Live data from Hacker News

Terraform-AWS-modules/Terraform-AWS-eks transitions to non-free license

github.com

121–127 of 127 posts

Re: Terraform-AWS-modules/Terraform-AWS-eks transitions to non-free license

#121
post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A piece of software is a platform - but using this platform (granted to the author by the participation of a community) to further a different, unrelated ideology could be considered abuse of power. I disagree, I think using any platform you have to spread a message that is important to you is a GREAT use of said platform. Anyone who thinks using your platform regardless of the context is bad are people who feel in…

> I think using any platform you have to spread a message that is important to you is a GREAT use of said platform. you think that because the message resonates with you. You happen to agree with the ideology being presented. If you truly are one who would allow such political messages to be sent via an unrelated platform, then you are also implicitly in agreement to acts of terrorism. After all, the terrorists are j…

That's a large reach you have there, did the Guinness book of world records come and award you a trophy?

Re: Terraform-AWS-modules/Terraform-AWS-eks transitions to non-free license

#122
post #36
post #11

I’m ethically torn here. On one hand, I ask myself what I would have done if I worked at IBM in the 1930s[0] On the other hand, as an LGBT person, I firmly believe that maximal freedom of speech protects vulnerable people from erasure. What this means for free software is a tough question. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_World_War_II

> "maximal freedom of speech protects vulnerable people from erasure" It's very easy to say things like this without fully comprehending all of the implications. Here's an example: Google restricted the usage of its own product, Google Maps, in an effort to halt the killing of Ukrainians by Russian armed forces, who were using Google Maps to launch their operations. This directly contradicts your claim.

Here, google didn't approache freedom of speech. They merely restricted the services of their product in a particular area

Re: Terraform-AWS-modules/Terraform-AWS-eks transitions to non-free license

#123
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but software licenses are related to the field of software and freedom _within_ software. I'd hate to say it, but including other political ideologies into the software license is making it more political. If the author of the software wants to, he is within his rights, but i think it's the wrong platform to try to voice his opinion. A piece of software is a platform - but using this platform (granted to the author b…

> A piece of software is a platform - but using this platform (granted to the author by the participation of a community) to further a different, unrelated ideology could be considered abuse of power. I disagree, I think using any platform you have to spread a message that is important to you is a GREAT use of said platform. Anyone who thinks using your platform regardless of the context is bad are people who feel in…

>I disagree, I think using any platform you have to spread a message that is important to you is a GREAT use of said platform.

I'm curious, do you support the separation of church and state? Public school would be a great platform for Christian principals to spread the good word of God.

Re: Terraform-AWS-modules/Terraform-AWS-eks transitions to non-free license

#124
It is astonishing to me how poor our literacy of software licenses is as a community. Also, reading the comments here, there are two wholly independent things happening that most people are conflating as the same thing.

Software licenses are LEGAL DOCUMENTS. If you are not a lawyer, who has a specialty in this specific area of law, don’t go fucking with them.

1. Fuck Russia. This is the only right answer to the question.

Entirely separately is #2.

2. If you change the terms of a license, it’s a different license. The changed license was not the Apache 2.0 license, and was additionally a breaking change in every sense of the phrase.

I appreciate that @antonbabenko recognized this and fixed it, but these two issues are entirely separate. What Russia is doing is terrible. That is an absolute fact. But the new Terraform variables that were added in that commit have absolutely nothing to do with making the software work in the way that it was intended to, therefore, they do not belong.

This has nothing to do with being anti-politics. I’m very heavily political, and I fully support Ukraine in this case. I also have strong opinions on both “free software“ and also “open source software“, and I apply them at the license level by selecting a pre-existing license without making custom modifications to it.

But things like `var.putin_khuylo` simply don’t belong in the software itself. Nor does it belong in an OSI-approved software license.

Re: Terraform-AWS-modules/Terraform-AWS-eks transitions to non-free license

#125
post #69

FWIW anyone I don't think apache 2's definition is set in stone. Think of this as derivative of apache 2, without the author saying it's apache 2.

It’s literally a pre-defined legal document. It’s definitely set in stone enough to warrant filing lawsuits and taking people to court over.

Re: Terraform-AWS-modules/Terraform-AWS-eks transitions to non-free license

#126
post #124

It is astonishing to me how poor our literacy of software licenses is as a community. Also, reading the comments here, there are two wholly independent things happening that most people are conflating as the same thing. Software licenses are LEGAL DOCUMENTS. If you are not a lawyer, who has a specialty in this specific area of law, don’t go fucking with them. 1. Fuck Russia. This is the only right answer to the quest…

Similarly: https://snyk.io/blog/peacenotwar-malicious-npm-node-ipc-pack...

Re: Terraform-AWS-modules/Terraform-AWS-eks transitions to non-free license

#127
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author of the module disagrees with the author of the PR that adding this additional restriction does not make the project Apache License anymore.

Thanks for the explanation. English is not my native language and I read the comment as if the commenter had fundamental disagreements with the author of the PR but had to agree with him on this particular point about license terms.

English is my native language and I also read it that way!
Post reply on HN